Guest YORAM Posted May 6, 2018 at 01:14 AM Report Share Posted May 6, 2018 at 01:14 AM iN THE MATTER OF PUNISHING A MEMBER, The Bylaws say vote by ballot: ..."arbitrator’s ruling of the facts of the matter and recommendation of punishment, if any, shall be submitted to the general membership for approval, at the next GMM, before the proposed punishment can become final. At the GMM, held in an executive session, [that safeguards the privacy of the accused and the Association] a simple majority of Active members present and voting by ballot is needed to affirm..." [Emphasis added] The GMM voted NOT by ballot, but by show of hands. Is that OK? Does the punishment stand? Or is it invalid? Thank you Yoram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted May 6, 2018 at 01:24 AM Report Share Posted May 6, 2018 at 01:24 AM (edited) According to RONR, if the bylaws require a ballot vote, that provision cannot be waived or suspended. RONR , p. 251. I believe the vote was invalid. Whether you may (or must) vote again or if it is too late I cannot tell you based on the information you gave us. Stay tuned. Others May disagree or want to add more information Edited May 6, 2018 at 01:28 AM by Richard Brown Added citation to RONR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted May 6, 2018 at 03:25 AM Report Share Posted May 6, 2018 at 03:25 AM (edited) 6 hours ago, Guest YORAM said: Is that OK? Does the punishment stand? Or is it invalid? Well, it's not okay, in that it is never okay to violate your bylaws. If I were answering on a fresh piece of paper, so to speak, I would say that the decision nonetheless stands since no complaint was made at the time, and the procedural defect is now not timely. The rule in RONR, in my opinion, simply means that waiving or suspending it is out of order, not that the issue remains timely after the decision is made. But Mr. Brown's taking a different position makes me question my own. Having thought it through, I still don't see a way clear to agreeing with Mr. Brown, but I can't answer with confidence. Edited to add: Shows what I get for writing without looking in the book. Edited May 6, 2018 at 07:43 AM by Joshua Katz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner Posted May 6, 2018 at 04:37 AM Report Share Posted May 6, 2018 at 04:37 AM The Book is quite clear that violating a rule that a vote be taken by ballot constitutes an ongoing breach susceptible to a Point of Order at any future time. RONR (11th ed.), p. 251, l. 20–22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted May 6, 2018 at 02:05 PM Report Share Posted May 6, 2018 at 02:05 PM (edited) I agree with Mr. Brown. RONR notes that a vote will be null and void and subject to a point of order after the fact where there is a violation of "a rule in the bylaws requiring a vote to be taken by ballot (p. 251, ll. 21-22)." In such cases, a point of order may be raised while the breach is continuing. This would not be the case if the breach of the rules was not continuing, e.g. the member was suspended for one hour and the suspension had no detrimental effects to the member from then on. Edited May 6, 2018 at 02:08 PM by J. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts